Myocardial InfarctionPhase 4NCT00356044
Arterial Access for Coronary Intervention in Myocardial Infarction
A Phase 4 study testing Coronary angioplasty in people with Myocardial Infarction and Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, run by Hospital Juan Canalejo at 3 sites in Spain.
Trial summary
The aim of this study is to compare the radial and femoral access for percutaneous interventions in the acute phase of the ST elevation acute myocardial infarction in terms of efficacy and security. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Myocardial Infarction, Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, Myocardial Reperfusion
- What is being tested?
- Coronary angioplasty
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 439 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesSpain
- Study dates
- May 2004to Dec 2005
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients with ST elevation acute myocardial infarction referred for primary,facilitated or of rescue coronary angioplasty in the first 12 hours since the start of the symptoms.
Who cannot join
- Patients in cardiogenic shock were excluded following operator criteria.
- Previous coronary surgery with mammary artery graft
- Coronary artery intervention in the previous month
- Absolute or relative contraindication for access via the radial artery route:Radial pulse absent or weak, abnormal Allen test,anatomy known to impede the use of the radial route or hemodialysis or advanced chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine >3 mg/dl).
- Patients with absolute or relative contraindication for the use of the femoral route.
- Absence of informed consent from the patient
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
Spain3 sites
Hospital Juan Canalejo
A Coruña, A Coruña, 15006
Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago
Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, 15706
Hospital do Meixoeiro
Vigo, Pontevedra, 36200
About this study
Official title: Femoral Versus Radial Access for Coronary Intervention in the Acute Phase of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction
The aim of this study is to compare the radial and femoral access for percutaneous interventions in the acute phase of the ST elevation acute myocardial infarction in terms of efficacy and security.
Read the detailed description
Some groups have previously used the radial artery as the access route in the procedures of percutaneous coronary revascularization, with good results. The advantages of the radial compared with femoral access are related to a lower incidence of vascular complications. The radial access has also inconveniences such as a less predictable anatomy which can make the procedure difficult and prolong the time required.The patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction have an increased risk of vascular complications after interventional procedures because previous antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy.On the other hand, the time and success of the procedure are significant prognostic issues.In this sitting, the radial approach might reduce vascular complications and increase other cardiovascular events when comparing with the classical femoral access. For this reason, the purpose of the study is to compare both arterial access in terms of efficacy and security and to quantify the consequences of the advantages and drawbacks of both.
- Conditions
- Myocardial Infarction, Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, Myocardial Reperfusion
- Being tested
- Coronary angioplasty
- Keywords
- Transradial access, Femoral access, Femoral vs radial access
- Medical subject headings
- Myocardial Infarction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Coronary angioplastyProcedure or surgery
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
All cause mortality at 30 days
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
New ST elevation acute myocardial infarction at 30 days
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Coronary revascularization as a result of recurrent ischemia at 30 days
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Major vascular complications at 30 days.
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Secondary outcomes (6)
Embolic stroke at 30 days
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Coronary revascularization at 30 days
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Cardiovascular mortality at 30 days
Measured: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Procedural time
Hospital stay
Estimation of costs
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Jul 2006 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2004
- Study completionDec 2005
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Myocardial InfarctionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 439 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Juan Canalejo
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Jose M Vazquez-Rodriguez, MD, Study chair, Hospital Juan CanalejoJose A Baz, Alonso, Principal investigator, Hospital do meixoeiroAndrés Iñiguez-Romo, MD, Study director, Hospital do MeixoeiroNicolás Vázquez-González, MD, Study director, Hospital Juan CanalejoRamón Calviño-Santos, MD, Principal investigator, Hospital Juan CanalejoAntonio Amaro-Cendón, MD, Study director, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de SantiagoRamiro Trillo, Nouche, Principal investigator, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00356044
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CEICG 2004/063
- Status last verified
- Jul 2007
- First submitted
- 24 Jul 2006
- Last updated
- 11 Jul 2007
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Saito S, Tanaka S, Hiroe Y, Miyashita Y, Takahashi S, Tanaka K, Satake S. Comparative study on transradial approach vs. transfemoral approach in primary stent implantation for patients with acute myocardial infarction: results of the test for myocardial infarction by prospective unicenter randomization for access sites (TEMPURA) trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003 May;59(1):26-33. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10493.
PubMed 12720237Exaire JE, Dauerman HL, Topol EJ, Blankenship JC, Wolski K, Raymond RE, Cohen EA, Moliterno DJ; TARGET Investigators. Triple antiplatelet therapy does not increase femoral access bleeding with vascular closure devices. Am Heart J. 2004 Jan;147(1):31-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.07.019.
PubMed 14691415Vazquez Rodriguez JM, Calvino Santos R, Baz Alonso JA, Trillo Nouche R, Salgado Fernandez J, Sanmartin Fernandez M, et al. Radial vs. Femoral access in emergent coronary interventions for acute myocerdial infarction with ST segment elevation (abstract). Innovation in Intervention: i2 Summit 2007 Abstract Sessions. 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.048. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49(9_Suppl_B):12B.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Jul 2007. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Femoral Versus Radial Access for Coronary Intervention in the Acute Phase of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00356044
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CEICG 2004/063
- Conditions
- Myocardial Infarction, Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, Myocardial Reperfusion
- Keywords
- Transradial access, Femoral access, Femoral vs radial access
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 439 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Juan CanalejoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- May 2004
- Study completion
- Dec 2005 (actual)
- First posted
- 25 Jul 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The aim of this study is to compare the radial and femoral access for percutaneous interventions in the acute phase of the ST elevation acute myocardial infarction in terms of efficacy and security.
Detailed description
Some groups have previously used the radial artery as the access route in the procedures of percutaneous coronary revascularization, with good results. The advantages of the radial compared with femoral access are related to a lower incidence of vascular complications. The radial access has also inconveniences such as a less predictable anatomy which can make the procedure difficult and prolong the time required.The patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction have an increased risk of vascular complications after interventional procedures because previous antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy.On the other hand, the time and success of the procedure are significant prognostic issues.In this sitting, the radial approach might reduce vascular complications and increase other cardiovascular events when comparing with the classical femoral access. For this reason, the purpose of the study is to compare both arterial access in terms of efficacy and security and to quantify the consequences of the advantages and drawbacks of both.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with ST elevation acute myocardial infarction referred for primary,facilitated or of rescue coronary angioplasty in the first 12 hours since the start of the symptoms.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Patients in cardiogenic shock were excluded following operator criteria.
- Previous coronary surgery with mammary artery graft
- Coronary artery intervention in the previous month
- Absolute or relative contraindication for access via the radial artery route:Radial pulse absent or weak, abnormal Allen test,anatomy known to impede the use of the radial route or hemodialysis or advanced chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine >3 mg/dl).
- Patients with absolute or relative contraindication for the use of the femoral route.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Coronary angioplasty | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
All cause mortality at 30 days
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
New ST elevation acute myocardial infarction at 30 days
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Coronary revascularization as a result of recurrent ischemia at 30 days
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Major vascular complications at 30 days.
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
6 secondary outcomes
Embolic stroke at 30 days
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Coronary revascularization at 30 days
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Cardiovascular mortality at 30 days
Time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction
Procedural time
Hospital stay
Estimation of costs
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Jul 2007.
- Background: PubMed 12720237Saito S, Tanaka S, Hiroe Y, Miyashita Y, Takahashi S, Tanaka K, Satake S. Comparative study on transradial approach vs. transfemoral approach in primary stent implantation for patients with acute myocardial infarction: results of the test for myocardial infarction by prospective unicenter randomization for access sites (TEMPURA) trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003 May;59(1):26-33. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10493.
- Background: PubMed 14691415Exaire JE, Dauerman HL, Topol EJ, Blankenship JC, Wolski K, Raymond RE, Cohen EA, Moliterno DJ; TARGET Investigators. Triple antiplatelet therapy does not increase femoral access bleeding with vascular closure devices. Am Heart J. 2004 Jan;147(1):31-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.07.019.
- Results publicationVazquez Rodriguez JM, Calvino Santos R, Baz Alonso JA, Trillo Nouche R, Salgado Fernandez J, Sanmartin Fernandez M, et al. Radial vs. Femoral access in emergent coronary interventions for acute myocerdial infarction with ST segment elevation (abstract). Innovation in Intervention: i2 Summit 2007 Abstract Sessions. 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.048. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49(9_Suppl_B):12B.
Related trials for Myocardial Infarction
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Roxadustat and Myocardial Injury After Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Active, not recruitingObservational study
A Longitudinal Cohort Study to Evaluate Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Disease in Haiti
Hypertension, Diabetes
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Study of Inclisiran to Prevent Cardiovascular Events in High-risk Primary Prevention Patients.
Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease
Enrolling by invitation
The DANE-HEART Trial - Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography for Primary Prevention
Coronary Atherosclerosis and Other Heart Disease, Cardiovascular Diseases
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Elicit Drugs in Myocardial Infarction
Young Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jose M Vazquez-Rodriguez, MD study chair
Hospital Juan Canalejo
Jose A Baz, Alonso principal investigator
Hospital do meixoeiro
Andrés Iñiguez-Romo, MD study director
Hospital do Meixoeiro
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Coronary angioplasty in people with Myocardial Infarction and Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, run by Hospital Juan Canalejo at 3 sites in Spain.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Jul 2007. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
All cause mortality at 30 days (time frame: within the first 30 days (plus or minus 5 days) after the index myocardial infarction). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00356044, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Jul 2007.